I think you’re right that the blade problem is mostly used in the context of right-wingers trying to tarnish and muddy Wind’s image, but I don’t see it as particularly negative for media to be made that highlights the fact that they could eventually become biodegradable. IMO it puts a cap on any right-wing jab by having an easily linkable response that effectively says “Well, that claim will soon be moot anyway.” And it can again be emphasized that in proportion, it’s not a problem to begin with.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 month ago
The problem is that it validates the claim to offer a “solution” (it isn’t) to the “problem” (it isn’t). It’s counter productive to validate the claim by offering this retort.
I’d be more than happy with seeing these things repurposed into something useful. If we’re in a position where windmill blades are littering the landscape because we have a preponderance of cheap/ free/ non polluting energy, that’s a good thing.
YungOnions@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Assuming this is a non-issue like you say, I still don’t see why that makes this a problem?
Why? This makes it seem like we can only concentrate on one issue at a time and that by making biodegradable blades we’re somehow stopping something more ‘worthwhile’ from happening? We can do multiple things at once. Even if this makes only a minor difference, I still don’t see why that’s a bad thing? Surely any attempt to improve things is a good thing, no?
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 month ago
You are validating bad faith criticisms by engaging with them. You give them substance by addressing them.